So we come to the fork

Keep feeding the voracious Washington beast? Or put it on a diet?

It's as if, after the iceberg, the captain of the Titanic was announcing a pool party.

While unemployment has remained around 9 percent at best and the national debt has ballooned by more than a third under this president, the White House has added seven employees and some $4 million more in salary since Mr. Obama took office.

"No recession for Obama's 454 White House aides: They'll make $37,121,463 this year," blared a Los Angeles Times blog after the annual release of the White House payroll last week.

More than 140 Obama aides make over $100,000, 11 more than under the Bush administration.

No wonder Mr. Obama is addicted to raising taxes: The mushrooming costs of just his White House are but one small part of a federal behemoth whose hunger knows no bounds and who will eat us all alive if unchecked.

Reports this past week also indicate that staff raises at the White House far outpace either inflation or raises elsewhere in the country.

Meanwhile, the White House Council of Economic Advisers claims the stimulus bill saved or created 2.4 million jobs at a cost of $666 billion -- or about $278,000 per job.

When the president says he wants to create jobs, take a pass. Others can do it much less expensively.

Yep. No recession at 1600 Pennsylvania. And these are the people we're depending on to cut the deficit by Aug. 2? Pass the lifeboats!

Much preferable, and much more sane, is the approach of those, such as South Carolina's Gov. Nikki Haley and Sen. Jim DeMint, who, with other conservative leaders around the country, have signed the "Cut, Cap, Balance" pledge.

The pledge -- put forth by a broad and growing group of grassroots organizations around the country -- would provide "significant spending cuts, a statutory spending cap and a balanced budget amendment to the U.S. Constitution as preconditions to raising the federal debt limit," Haley said.

The pledge would require any rise in the nation's debt limit to be tied to substantial spending cuts and congressional support for a balanced budget down the road.

Don't we, in fact, owe that to our descendants?

"Instead of taking the easy way out and raising the debt limit," Haley said in a statement, "it's time for politicians to make the same tough decisions we're making in South Carolina."

Amen.

Even better, though not likely to gain as much steam, is our own Rep. Paul Broun's bill to actually lower the debt ceiling instead of raising it. The Georgia congressman's logic is unassailable -- which means it won't go anywhere in Washington: A family with out-of-control debt would cut back, not seek even more credit.

Talk about a fork in the road: Some in Washington -- the president and congressional Democrats -- are yearning for more money. And in a recessionary economy! How counterproductive is that? Meanwhile, Republicans want spending cuts. That's the choice being made as the White House and Congress meet to hammer out an agreement to deal with the debt ceiling deadline.

Republicans come to the table with a mandate, delivered by voters last November, to get control of federal spending. Mr. Obama is banking on that mandate to ebb with time -- and on selling class warfare in order to raise taxes on couples earning more than $250,000. In the process, he's trying to convince voters that soaking the rich will solve our problems. It won't. You could confiscate all their wealth and still have a debt problem.

Especially when government operations continue to increase their spending.

ADVISORY: Users are solely responsible for opinions they post here and for
following agreed-upon rules of civility. Posts and
comments do not reflect the views of this site. Posts and comments are
automatically checked for inappropriate language, but readers might find some
comments offensive or inaccurate. If you believe a comment violates our rules,
click the "Flag as offensive" link below the comment.

Interesting, but I cannot agree with the ACES' interpretation of the situation. 1. The debt is high, but "out of control" only because the Republicans are messing wth the debt limit. Many financially healthy families carry a much higher ratio of debt. A couple that just bought a house and car probably carry debt at about 3x their family income. 2. The White House's original proposal was to charge a fairer tax rate for people whose taxable income was over $250,000. Not gross income. This is not made clear in the editorial. 4. The current proposal from the White House isn't even asking that much. They're asking to close loopholes and subsidies for the very rich (which, sorry, probably doesn't include you, Mr. Ryan) and special interests like big oil and agribusiness. With the huge concentration of wealth in the hands of a few thousand Americans, there is no way to balance the budget if they don't pay their fair share. Once you're done with tax breaks and special taxation laws, the super-rich pay taxes at a lower rate than the middle class. Asking them to pay their fair share is not "soaking the rich." 5. I submit that it is the super-rich who are spreading class warfare, not the average American. 6. The word "compromise" seems to have vanished from the conservative vocabulary. Obama has made a new proposal that gives the Republicans about 3/4 of what they want and about 1/4 of what he wants. They could give a little bit, don't you think? The Republicans' proposals constitute a massive cutback in America's obligatons and essential government services. They are not responsible proposals, and are plausible only to persons who are quite uninformed.

So its all the Republicans fault, eh Rhetor? Obama, with a willing Democrat controlled congress, added 3 trillion to the debt his first year in office. Those pesky facts keep getting in the liberals way.

First this is a stupid argument. I doubt anyone even knows what this is or what it is about.

Anyone who would suggest we should not riase it, and instaed default on our national debt wants a world wide depression. Because that's what would happen.

The spending being done now has NOTHING to do with the reason this must be done.

I suggest you all who support this dig into what the debt ceiling REALLY is. I am disappointed in Rep Broun, he seems to have no clue what this is about either. Cutting spending to ZERO now would not prevent the debt ceiling from having to be raised.

I am amazed by the willfull ignorance of folks who should know better.

Here is a link for some basic info on what it is and how it works. Anyone wishing for default wants America to collapse and a world wide collapse of the dollar value as well.

"An issue of note is that failure to extend the limit may leave the federal government unable to pay all its obligations, including paying interest on existing debt, a default that could have serious repercussions..."

Well, "serious repercussions" is the understatement of the century on this issue; try total collapse of the dollar on the world market and that would force a lot of industry to turn to other currencies like the Euro. Imagine if the USD were removed as the currency of oil tranactions? It would be if the dollar collapsed due to the USA defaulting on debt, which is what WILL happen if the debt ceiling is not raised.

President Obama has slowly learned he lives in a country with a capitalistic economic system. The problem is we have been paying to send him to Economics 101 at a land grant school to clear his mind of all the Marxist Ivy Leagues lectures.

The capitalist system creates jobs when it feels its money will be returned with interest. A pretty simple concept. Obama thought he could do otherwise for a few years, but it appears now, even he, is starting to wake up. He talks of making things easier for businesses.

Of course the Marxist class warfare still surfaces now and then with his envy of executives and their corporate jets. He’s a work in progress.

I guess what we need is another stimulus like the last one. All those ‘shovel ready’ jobs on roads and bridges, oops they were not ‘shovel ready’ as they thought. The community organizer would NOT know a ‘shovel ready’ job if he saw one because he has never had a real job. Maybe we need more jobs like the $1.6 billion at SRS for maybe 3000 temporary jobs for a couple of years. That is about a $500,000 for each temporary job.
Yeah we need 4 more years of the community organizer.

"Anyone who would suggest we should not riase it, and instaed default on our national debt wants a world wide depression. Because that's what would happen." It's not an either or. There is enough money from current receipts to prevent the default. It is a matter of priority. Just like a family. You pay what you must, the house, food, etc and default on the satellite TV. I say we default on the salaries of these overpaid morons in Congress. It's a start.

If I have a choice between using Wikipedia to understand the debt ceiling or using common sense, I will use common sense anyday. Taking Wikipedia as absolute truth is no different than taking the comments on here as the same.

Pres. Obama is using the same scare tactics to raise the debt ceiling as Pres. Bush used in going to war in Iraq.

Brad, you hit the nail on the head; even though this economy is shaky and yes, we need to correct the process.......it is bearing the weight of U S society as we know it. We cannot under any circumstances, cut the legs out from under what we have now. Even though it is strained, we need to restructure and lower the debt gradually until it gets to the point we can restructure with the least possible risk of collapse.

Conservative economists tend to say have the Fed reduce interest rates so people and businesses will borrow and spend more. But what happens when banks aren't lending money as they are today? You can lower to interest rate to zero, but if banks aren't approving loans, it's not going to work. So the next step, according to conservatives, is giving tax cuts to the rich. They claim the upper classes will be stimulated to work much harder and they are the ones who are most productive and that will make the economy hum again. The problem is, it never works. It didn't work under Reagan or Bush II. HW Bush (aka Bush II) famously called this "voodoo economics"
Yet republicans in congress are again espousing the same type of program that got us in hot water in the first place. History shows us that the only way to get to get out of a deep depression and/or recession is to apply a Keynesian economic policy, similar to the one used during WWII.
Think of the economy as an apple tree. If you drastically cut off all it's branches, you will stun or kill it. It will not produce fruit. Whereas if you fertilize, water, and spray the same tree, you will have an increase in the production of fruit.
A reasonable plan of action would be to raise the debt ceiling so that we can continue the fertilization of the economy tree, and attach a budget cutting unnessary and wasteful spending. Once the economy has been restored to a healthy place, then we can take action on reducing our debts. It's all about priorities.

Reducing spending will not create one new job. None. Even Republicans know that their budget plan of cutting spending by trillions will not create jobs. In reality, it will simply increase unemployment as more public employees are terminated. Which will increase the government spending requirements, as it will increase the number of people on unemployment, needing healthcare without insurance, etc. What is needed is to re-balance spending, directing it away from foreign military escapades, un-doing the devastating Bush tax cuts for the corporations and the rich, and investing in education, research in science, technological R&D, healthcare and programs that build our country.

The budget was balanced when Bush took office. Obama has continued Bush economic policies. More of the same old conservative agenda of redistributing wealth to the rich and the corporations will solve nothing. It's time to chart a new course.

First of all, YANKEE, the "giving tax cuts to the rich" line by liberals is getting old. I got a tax cut, and believe me, I'M NOT RICH. Liberals seem content with leaving entitlements the way they are. IT ISN'T WORKING!

Idolatry of Reagan's "tax-cutting wonders" is asinine. In terms of the most basic measure of economic growth - increase in gross domestic product (GDP) - the vaunted "Reagan boom" was an unremarkable period of time. If we look at Reagan's eight years, and compare them with Clinton's and JFK/LBJ's, Reagan comes in dead last, with 31.7 per cent compared with Clinton's 33.1 per cent and JFK/LBJ's 47.1 per cent. Only Nixon/Ford's eight years make Reagan look good, with a mere 26.2 per cent growth.
Don't get drunk on Reagan's kool-aid. America will wake up with a bad hangover.

"First of all, YANKEE, the "giving tax cuts to the rich" line by liberals is getting old. I got a tax cut, and believe me, I'M NOT RICH"

SouthernGuy08, If you aren't rich, what are you whining about? I don't have a problem with cutting taxes for the middle and lower classes. When you look at the "pain factor" who do you think hurts more paying extra taxes?
When a person is blessed to a point of not having to worry about living paycheck to paycheck, doesn't it make more sense to ask them to carry a bigger load, rather than the people who are already stretched to the limit?

justthefacts, twist it around however you want, but it's called COMMON SENSE.
You have two boxes. One is already full. Do you keep packing stuff into the full box, possibly causing it to burst at the seams or start using the box that has more room?

Wow, What I can learn from republicans! Thanks for easing my mind, I now know what I have to do. In order for me to balance my budget, all I have to do is cut the amount of food I feed my family, cut what I pay for my utilities and my mortgage, and if my family gets sick, I'll just tell them they have to stay home and tough it out instead of going to the doctor. Perhaps I should tell my family that they should plan on dying young to cut our spending even more! Common sense! Of course! Why didn't I think of that?